My previous comments on this article were removed by the editor with no explanation. It seems Project Syndicate is not that much of an open space. We must congratulate the editors on keeping an image of a liberal platform while skillfully filtering content that would otherwise damage the notion of free exchange.

Personally I "gave up" on Erdoğan already back in 2005 when he uttered the following: "Freedom of expression is important, but more important is what is holy for me". This was in connection with the infamous Mohammad cartoons in a Danish newspaper, but the magnitude of potential consequences of such a mindset should have been clear for all to fathom. As the years went by it became increasingly apparent that Mr Erdoğan was dead serious when he came with that statement, he persecuted media people and private individuals for the most insignificant slights, while at the same time pushing ahead with gradual islamisation of Turkish society. Yet, as Mr Rodrik so clearly points out, western media continued to give the APK the misnomer of "mildly islamic party" up until very recently, and some still do. The narrative continues to thrive, but for how long?

As a 1st generation victim of the 1960 "putsch", as a member of the non-bureaucratic, non-military, entrepreneurial urban family, my family took refuge in 1961 as a gastarbeiter working in the coal mines of Essen, W. Germany. The left of the times and the military colluded in that takeover and the newly arising capitalists of the times were forced to pay their undue dues, by force and intimidation.

That left again recently played the same game, but this time it had sided with the religious zealots, against the military.

As a social democrat, not because of its' dogma, but because of appreciation of what it can offer as a political and economic alternative in Turkey, I would not side myself with the Turkish left because of its unprincipled stand that has been opportunistic, as shown by its actions in these 50-60 years.

Rodrik, your inside information of the military and how the institution has been usurped supposedly by left leaning post-Kemalist dogmatists, is good reading. It provides an alternative to the conventional news-media driven political excitement, just before the important upcoming national elections.

That a retrial last month cleared some 200 military suspects accused of plotting to remove Recep Tayyip Erdogan in 2003, showed that Turkey still has an impartial judiciary. They were freed last year when Turkey's Constitutional Court ruled that the trial had been "a sham". The prosecutor called for their acquittal, arguing that the "evidence against them was clearly forged". The acquittal has closed Erdogan's "Sledgehammer case", yet critics said the government had sought to use the judiciary for political ends, undermining Turkey's democracy.
Among the accused were "Turkey’s secular and military elites" - army chief, senior officers, journalists, lawyers, academics and politicians. They were seen as anti-government conspirators by the ruling Justice and Development (AK) Party, belonging to a shadowy network of ultra-nationalists and secularists. The investigation dated back to 2007 and reflected a deep hostility and suspicion between the two poles of the secular society and the political establishment.
The military, long seen as the guardian of Turkey's secular values, had been at loggerheads with Erdogan's Islamist government, since it was swept to power in 2002 on a wave of popularity. The army had a long history of intervening in politics, overthrowing three governments between 1960 and 1980, and putting pressure on Turkey's first Islamist government to step down in 1997. So the wave of arrests of senior military officers in 2010 over an alleged plot to topple Erodogan's government had raised concern in Washington that this could trigger an unpredictable military reaction.
The "military tutelage" was a thorn in many Turks' side. Supporters of Erdogan and Gülen believed the "political influence" of the shadowy military elite which governed Turkey from behind the scenes for decades posed the "greatest obstacle to democracy" and must be stopped from returning to power.
Nevertheless the two former allies Erdogan and Gülen, a cleric, had fallen out with each other. The latter, with his shadowy Islamic network, enjoys enormous power and influence in Turkish politics. This has alarmed Erdogan, who had declared war on Gülen, especially after the eruption of a corruption scandal compromising his family. Although he became Turkey's first popularly elected president last year, he still sees his fight with Gülen a matter of political survival.

New Comment

Pin comment to this paragraph

After posting your comment, you’ll have a ten-minute window to make any edits. Please note that we moderate comments to ensure the conversation remains topically relevant. We appreciate well-informed comments and welcome your criticism and insight. Please be civil and avoid name-calling and ad hominem remarks.

Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. If your email exists in our system, we'll send you an email with a link to reset your password. Please note that the link will expire twenty-four hours after the email is sent. If you can't find this email, please check your spam folder.